About Me

Since the 1990s I have been very involved with fighting the military "don't ask don't tell" policy for gays in the military, and with First Amendment issues. Best contact is 571-334-6107 (legitimate calls; messages can be left; if not picked up retry; I don't answer when driving) Three other url's: doaskdotell.com, billboushka.com johnwboushka.com Links to my URLs are provided for legitimate content and user navigation purposes only.
My legal name is "John William Boushka" or "John W. Boushka"; my parents gave me the nickname of "Bill" based on my middle name, and this is how I am generally greeted. This is also the name for my book authorship. On the Web, you can find me as both "Bill Boushka" and "John W. Boushka"; this has been the case since the late 1990s. Sometimes I can be located as "John Boushka" without the "W." That's the identity my parents dealt me in 1943!

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

I don’t normally get involved in one-sided campaigns to
defeat very narrow bills or changes, but there is a big push to stop the FCC
from gutting net neutrality as the second comment period ends. This seems to be designed to fund billboard
ads, link here.

The email I got suggested that Comcast was in secret
negotiations with Congress to gut net neutrality. I take this with a grain of salt personally.

Wednesday, August 09, 2017

Jon Brodkin of Ars Technica reports that almost 200 ISP’s in
the US still have data usage caps. A few
of them are very low (like 3GB) but not regularly enforced. Larger ISP’s typically inforce 1TB to 3
TB. Comcast usually allows 1 TB per
month and charges $10 for each 50 GB afterward. But it is very unlikely that a
typical home user would reach 1 TB, unless a large household doing binge
watching, or some sort of heavy duty P2P.

Comcast allows guest accounts (encourages the practice for
Airbnb) for security (xfinitywifi), which would arguably count against the
limit.

It’s arguable (in Ait Pai’s thinking) that looser network
neutrality could give some ISP’s a motive to up the data limits.

The main argument offered was that if big telecom companies are allowed to set up fast lanes for other big businesses that they own or that pay them off, ordinary consumers will not find their competitors. So it sounds like an anti-trust argument, and similar arguments have been made against Google and search engine results. Speakers also noted that major Silicon Valley companies support neutrality and that major startups have developed during this period. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) led the event. But then look at Timothy B. Lee’s recent Vox piece, “The End of the Internet Startup”.

Another major argument was that network neutrality helps minority voices (people of color, LGBT, and immigrant) voices be heard.

There are more videos from this event on my Wordpress "Media Reviews" blog here.

"The biggest concern among many Internet users, especially small
businesses or individuals running their own Internet domains, either on their
own servers or with shared hosting services, is that, if network neutrality
provisions are rolled back, then some or all telecommunications providers might
start treating websites as if they were analogous to cable television channels
and not offer access to all of them unless paid by content providers.

"But it does appear the NCTS-itv has promised that its
members indeed will not do this, and will continue to allow lawful content to
be accessed from the United States from their servers in the same manner as
today.

"My own stake in this is as a political and social
commentator who has very low costs in developing and posting content, but whose
operations could not “pay their own way” in an environment if indeed telecom
providers changed the “rules of the game” so to speak.

"I can understand the position that says, a telecom provider
might want to provide a very low-cost service for some customers with very
limited web access, in the same sense that I recall that ten years ago many cell
phones did not yet offer web access at all.
I also remember that in the earliest days of the public Internet, in the
mid 1990s, “proprietary content” from big providers like AOL and Prodigy ruled
the world until about 1997 or so, as it became more common for users to apply
the html protocol on their own and expected to find any website this way. I also realize that over time, consumer modes
of access change, as from the dialup (which in time became reasonably effective
for text and smaller images, although not for video) of 20 years ago, to
wireless mobile devices today, with a backbone in conventional PC or Mac or
Linux computer and laptop access.

"My main expectation would be that telecom providers would
facilitate or allow connection to my sites the same way as it happens today,
for about the same cost, in both mobile and desktop or PC usage, in wireless,
FIOS and conventional cable. If some
users with very limited plans could not access my sites, that probably would
not affect me, as such consumers are probably not interested in my kind of
content anyway. But such a develop could seriously affect some kinds of small
businesses, whose owners depend on inexpensive Internet web access from all potential
consumers to make a living. And such a
development could hamper some kinds of innovation.

"I don’t have a problem with the idea that, even in a reasonably
regulated environment, some providers (such as those performing rescue or
emergency medicine) have a legitimate need for fast lanes; this should not
affect ordinary use. "

When you submit the comment the form removes the paragraphs, but the email confirmation restores themm.

Wednesday, June 07, 2017

ATT recently (May 31) published a blog post by Hank Hultquist, Chairman of “Federal Regulatory” offering the viewpoint that Obama’s net neutrality rules (FCC’s common carrier concept) are predicated on the idea that an ISP advertises itself as a “neutral conduit”, link here.

That is, there is nothing inherently illegal even now for a small ISP to deliver only carefully curated websites to, say, a religious consumer subset that wants only a limited Internet exposure.

That’s true, this wouldn’t matter as long as the major companies maintain their public posture as “public accommodations”, so to speak.

And none of the major ISP’s have indicated any interest in censoring or blocking content. They might have issues with, say, porn sites that use enormous bandwidth.

And today, Wednesday June 7, 2017, p. A14 of the Washington Post carries a story by Brian Fung, “Web companies plan July ‘day of action’ in push to protect net neutrality”, link here. The companies involved are Amazon, Reddit, Mozilla and Kickstarter, on Wednesday July 12, 2017. Fung reminds us of a similar day in January 2012 to protest SOPA when Wikipedia went dark. Fung still rehearses the idea that “neutral” ISP’s could throttle content they don’t like. I’m still getting lots of emails asking me to “join in” a hyped petition. The last day for comments is July 17, and I will probably submit one. Fung reiterates, however, that ISP’s still say they are committed to neutrality in practice.

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Well, the comment period on the rollback of Network Neutrality has started, by a 2-1 vote today, overlooked by the media given all of Trump’s antics. Arstechnica, normally level headed, seems to think that the sky is falling, as in “Chicken Little”

I think I may well make a formal comment during the open period, before July 17.

Arst Technica links to a listof some ISP violations over the years. In one case, a labor union’s site was reportedly blocked. Comcast apparently tried to interfere with user P2P, which is odd because Comcast doesn’t offer OpenDNS (I think Verizon does), which is how a host (like for Airbnb) could try to block anyone using his router from doing most possible illegal downloading for which the host could be liable.

This topic needs our continued attention to see what ISP’s really say they want to do.

Tracking Code

Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy for billboushkann.blogspot.com

If you require any more information or have any questions about my privacy policy, please feel free to contact me by email at JBoushka@aol.com.

At billboushkann.blogspot.com , the privacy of my visitors is of extreme importance to me. This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by billboushkann.blogspot.com and how it is used.

Log Files Like many other Web sites, billboushkann.blogspot.com makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol ( IP ) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider ( ISP ), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user’s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons billboushkann.blogspot.com does not use cookies.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

.:: Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on billboushkann.blogspot.com .
.:: Google's use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to your users based on their visit to billboushkann.blogspot.com and other sites on the Internet.
.:: Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following link.

Some of my advertising partners may use cookies and web beacons on my site. My advertising partners include ....... Google Adsense

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on billboushkann.blogspot.com send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

billboushkann.blogspot.com has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. billboushkann.blogspot.com 's privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browsers' respective websites.